Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29675474›Full record

ArticleTomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.)2018

Brain Tumor Characterization Using Multibiometric Evaluation of MRI.

Faris Durmo, Jimmy Lätt, Anna Rydelius, Silke Engelholm, Sara Kinhult, Krister Askaner, Elisabet Englund, Johan Bengzon, Markus Nilsson, Isabella M Björkman-Burtscher and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. MultivoxelTomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2018
    Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Faris DurmoDepartment of Radiology, Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Jimmy LättCentre for Medical Imaging and Physiology, Skåne University Hospital, Lund and Malmö, Sweden.
Anna RydeliusDepartment of Neurology, Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Silke EngelholmDepartment of Oncology, Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Sara KinhultDepartment of Oncology, Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Krister AskanerCentre for Medical Imaging and Physiology, Skåne University Hospital, Lund and Malmö, Sweden.
Elisabet EnglundDepartment of Pathology, Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Johan BengzonDepartment of Neurosurgery, Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Markus NilssonDepartment of Radiology, Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Isabella M Björkman-BurtscherDepartment of Radiology, Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Thomas ChenevertDepartment of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Linda KnutssonDepartment of Medical Radiation Physics, Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Pia C SundgrenDepartment of Radiology, Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Lund University · SESkåne University Hospital · SEUniversity of Michigan–Ann Arbor · USJohns Hopkins University · US

Funding

QUANTITATION OF HUMAN BRAIN TUMOR THERAPY RESPONSE BY MRP01CA085878 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI CHENEVERT, THOMAS L · 2001 to 2017
$31.9M
NCI NIH HHS P01 CA085878
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim was to evaluate volume, diffusion, and perfusion metrics for better presurgical differentiation between high-grade gliomas (HGG), low-grade gliomas (LGG), and metastases (MET). For this retrospective study, 43 patients with histologically verified intracranial HGG (n = 18), LGG (n = 10), and MET (n = 15) were chosen. Preoperative magnetic resonance data included pre- and post-gadolinium contrast-enhanced T1-weighted fluid-attenuated inversion recover, cerebral blood flow (CBF), cerebral blood volume (CBV), fractional anisotropy, and apparent diffusion coefficient maps used for quantification of magnetic resonance biometrics by manual delineation of regions of interest. A binary logistic regression model was applied for multiparametric analysis and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Statistically significant differences were found for normalized-ADC-tumor (nADC-T), normalized-CBF-tumor (nCBF-T), normalized-CBV-tumor (nCBV-T), and normalized-CBF-edema (nCBF-E) between LGG and HGG, and when these metrics were combined, HGG could be distinguished from LGG with a sensitivity and specificity of 100%. The only metric to distinguish HGG from MET was the normalized-ADC-E with a sensitivity of 68.8% and a specificity of 80%. LGG can be distinguished from MET by combining edema volume (Vol-E), Vol-E/tumor volume (Vol-T), nADC-T, nCBF-T, nCBV-T, and nADC-E with a sensitivity of 93.3% and a specificity of 100%. The present study confirms the usability of a multibiometric approach including volume, perfusion, and diffusion metrics in differentially diagnosing brain tumors in preoperative patients and adds to the growing body of evidence in the clinical field in need of validation and standardization.

Indexed as

brain metastasisbrain tumordiffusion-weighted imaginggliomaMRIperfusion-weighted imagingsensitivityspecificity

Identifiers

PMID29675474
PMCPMC5903291
OpenAlexW2796310005

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.